Skip to main content

tv   The Ed Show  MSNBC  August 1, 2012 8:00pm-9:00pm PDT

8:00 pm
word online on our blog every night,, featuring david cay johnston and the other guests on this show, the people who get to say a few more things that they wanted to say that they didn't quite get to say in our little time period here on the air. "the ed show" is up next. welcome to "the ed show." i'm michael eric dyson in for ed schultz. today, the president called america's olympic heroes just before he destroyed mitt romney for his gymnastics on taxes. this is "the ed show," and, as ed would say, let's get to work. >> how many of you want to pay another $200,000 to give mr. romney or me another tax break? >> tax breaks for the middle class, tax breaks for the wealthy. mitt romney's campaign is spinning hard after president obama hammers him on his tax plan. bob shrum and michael steele are here with reaction. today, the obamacare birth control mandate is in full
8:01 pm
effect, and let's just say the republicans are overreacting. >> i know in your mind you can think of the times when america was attacked. one was december 7th, pearl harbor. the other is september 11th. that's the day of the terrorist attack. i want you to remember august 1st, 2012, the attack on our religious freedom. that is a date that will live in infamy. >> the panel weighs in on a new era in women's health. >> and comedian d.l. huguely's new book on politics is quite a stir. >> it's provocative. >> the great d.l. huguely joins me live tonight. governor mitt romney's tax plan went to that strange foreign land called independent analysis and came back looking like a loser. unfortunately for mr. romney, the truth is out. his tax plan would slash taxes for the very rich and raise taxes on the poor and middle class. the independent study by the tax policy center bent over backwards to view romney's plan in a favorable light but concluded that the net effect of romney's plan would be this --
8:02 pm
millionaires would get an $87,000 tax cut but 95% of americans would suffer a $500 tax increase on average. it could be worse for families. the study shows that making governor romney's tax plan revenue neutral would require eliminating tax preferences for middle and lower income families, reducing their after-tax income by an average of $2,000. according to the tax policy center. president obama campaigning in ohio today was quick to seize on this damning new information. >> just today, an independent nonpartisan organization ran all the numbers on governor romney's plan. this wasn't my staff. this wasn't something we did. independent group ran the numbers. they found that if governor romney wants to keep his word and pay for this plan, then he then he'd have to cut tax breaks
8:03 pm
the middle class families depend on. >> ran the numbers. the president talked about some of the middle class tax breaks that would get slashed under romney's plan, like mortgage interest, employer provided health care, medical expenses, education and child care. president obama also pointed out just how great the disparity would be under romney's tax plan. >> in order to afford just one $250,000 tax cut for somebody like mr. romney, 125 families like yours would have to pay another $2,000 in taxes each and every year. how many of you want to pay another $2,000 to give mr. romney or me another tax break? >> now, you know the romney campaign hit back. a spokesman saying, president obama continues to tout liberal studies calling for more tax hikes and more government spending. funny thing, though, when governor rick perry was still in the race, the romney campaign was more than happy to cite the analysis of the tax policy center, and they didn't say anything about it being a liberal study there. in a press release from
8:04 pm
november, objective third-party analysis showed governor perry's plan would raise taxes on millions of american families but he doesn't seem interested in the discussion. this time around, it looks like mitt romney isn't interested in the discussion himself. meanwhile, there's still no republican love for a middle class tax cut in congress. today house republicans defeated a one-year extension of middle class tax cuts. this is the same bill that democrats passed in the senate and that president obama would gladly sign into law. you can bet president obama will highlight republican intransigence all the way to election day. the president got some good news on that front today. he's leading mitt romney in three key battleground states by healthy margins. in ohio, president obama leads romney by six points and he's hit the 50% mark. even in florida, generally considered a tougher state for the president, he leads by six points, 51% to 45%. and in pennsylvania, president obama leads by double digits. all three polls were of likely
8:05 pm
voters. get your cell phones out. i want to know what you think. tonight's question -- does mitt romney's tax plan make any sense for the middle class? text "a" for yes, text "b" for no to 622639. or go to our blog at i'll bring you the results later in the show. i'm joined by democratic strategist bob shrum and msnbc analyst and former rnc chairman michael steele. chairman steele, let me begin with you. >> how are you doing, sir? >> how are you doing, my friend? >> good. >> romney's policy director calls the study bias and said it ignores the explosion of economic growth under a romney administration, but the study took into account significant revenue assumed by his plan from economic growth and the numbers still don't add up. i don't want to say this is bush-like fuzzy math, but can the romney campaign so easily dismiss this study? >> no, i don't think necessarily they can. i think they have to take into
8:06 pm
account particularly if they referenced this particular organization in the past as legitimate and, you know, stand up with respect to analysis given about someone else's work, that, you know, they in turn should have to come back and be able to say, look, these are the numbers. i believe the campaign is prepared, at least the folks i talked to today, to go out and show where the study is off base, the numbers it doesn't take into account with respect to the growth expected from the middle class business community, which are largely small business owners who own businesses $250,000, $300,000 annual income. how those businesses will grow and prosper, how they'll be a part of creating jobs. i think they plan to do that. i don't know how they plan to roll it out. but i think this kind of took them a little flatfooted in terms of the obama campaign coming so squarely at the jaw on this issue with respect to romney's plan and particularly in light of, you know, his
8:07 pm
argument for taxes for all, they've narrowly sliced this thing i think pretty effective loy. it will be interesting to see what the romney campaign does, if they respond more broadly or more specifically with regard to the tax policy. >> brother shrum, it looks like a cut man is necessary in the romney corner because he's been hit pretty severely, and keep in mind the romney campaign cited the same group when they attacked governor perry's plan. do you think president obama can make the case that romney's so-called across the board tax cut would mean a tax increase for the middle class families. >> i find myself in the rare position of mostly agreeing with michael steele. people are going to have the reaction, what else are you going to expect from a guy who took a $77,000 deduction for his wife's dancing horse? i would say this was a wonderfully republican idea, but that's not fair. under george w. bush, there was a tax cut for everybody. the rich got more, but everybody got a tax cut. i think it's devastating if it
8:08 pm
is sustained that you have to have the average family paying $2,000 a year more so that the wealthiest people in the country can get a tax cut. look, this is all part of a narrative, and the president all along has refused to let this campaign simply be a referendum. the narrative started with bain job destruction, offshore tax havens, tax returns, the refusal to release them, which i think makes romney particularly vulnerable on this issue. and he's really asking a fundamental question -- who stands up for you, who stands up for the few? who is fighting for the middle class and who is not? i don't want to discomfort michael, but he's absolutely right. they have to get out there. they're going to have to have real facts and numbers and sustain them in the court of public opinion if they're not going to get trapped in this. >> brother steele, it's not only about the narrative, but it's also about the narrator. the authenticity about the person making the claim goes to their integrity and their suitability for the highest office in the land. >> right. >> it's true that romney's plan
8:09 pm
would cut certain tax loopholes for the will wealthy, but the net effect for them is still highly favorable. the net effect for the middle class families is not because certain taxes would be slashed. without getting too far into the weeds, this doesn't sound like a plan that would be easy for mitt romney to defend, is it? >> i think it does. i'm not into the minutia and detail of his plan specifically, but i think the romney team can make a broader argument about how you raise revenues in the country, who you go to to get those revenues, how do you sustain that to bring down the nation's debt and deficit. so i think he can lay out this argument relying largely on the growth that will come from an explosion of opportunity. you're cutting, for example, corporate tax rates, you're cutting the capital gains tax rate, the impact that has on small business owners immediately to free up capital reserves they have that they're just sitting on in many instances and not putting back into the economy for jobs and investment. i think they can very clearly make that argument, and the
8:10 pm
counterargument with respect to the president's own plan is, look, the president is talking about increasing taxes on the wealthy. that's only going to raise you $800 billion. how does that begin to get at the overall growth and explosion of $5 trillion that he has put on the back of small businesses and future generations? so they're going to be competing battle lines that are going to be drawn here. i think the president, as i said earlier, struck boldly, struck effectively, and romney coming off his european trip will now have to spain -- spin a little bit, get back on the game on the front of taxes and growth in the country, and i think that they can make the argument very effectively both for what he wants to do and what the president hasn't done. >> i'm sure he would say that's $800 billion more than romney would put forth. mr. shrum, here's more from president obama today. >> here's the thing, he's not asking you to contribute more to pay down the deficit. he's not asking you to pay more to invest in our children's
8:11 pm
education or rebuild our roads or put more folks back to work. he's asking you to pay more so that people like him can get a big tax cut. >> now, given what mr. steele's insightful analysis has been here tonight, mr. shrum, president obama isn't just painting this as bad for the middle class. he's showing how this is completely unserious as a means of deficit reduction, and he's doing a pretty effective job, no? >> i understand why michael isn't into the details of this. because i think if he got into the details of the romney plan, it would probably be as vulnerable and difficult as the details that are obviously hidden in those tax returns. secondly, there's a mythology here, by the way, which is if you cut taxes, capital gains taxes, marginal tax rates for the wealthy, how or another that's the marginal job creation. this is a lie, calling the wealthiest people in the country the job creators. under bill clinton, we had a
8:12 pm
slightly higher capital gains tax rate and we created 22 million jobs. the largest number of jobs creating in any eight-year period in american history. so why don't we go back to some kind of fundamental tax fairness, also try to raise some revenue by making the wealthy pay their fair share, and we'll be a lot better off. finally, by the way, most of that $4 trillion figure michael cites is part of a result of the bush economic collapse. >> you want to respond to that? >> i'll start at the end. wrong answer, this is not a result of the bush economic collapse. >> it sure is. everybody lost their jobs. everybody lost their jobs. >> let me finish, bob. it's the result of this administration coming out the door with a trillion dollars on the nation's credit card before we began. >> that was to keep people from being fired, to keep the economy from going into depression. >> bob, i let you talk. let me talk. >> bob, you're so wrong, i'm not going to let you talk. >> let mr. steele finish. >> let me tell you where you're wrong, and deal with it, okay?
8:13 pm
>> oh, i will deal with it. >> the reality of the facts are that -- >> the reality of the facts? >> the real facts, bob, okay? are that this administration spent $5 trillion. >> no, that's wrong. that's wrong. a lot of it is automatic stabilizers. >> let him get his point out so i can go to the break. >> bob, let me finish my point. >> it's a lie. >> it's not a lie. the debt was $10 trillion on the day obama was inaugurated. what is it today? it's almost $6 trillion. so who spent that money? who spent the money? >> because of the bush economic collapse. it went into unemployment compensation -- >> all right, gentlemen, i'm going to have to call that a draw or draw that to an end. michael steele and bob shrum, thanks so much for your time tonight. remember to answer the question at the bottom of the screen and share your thoughts on twitter and facebook. we want to know what you think. coming up, mitt romney's european vacation was either a disaster or a strong conservative statement depending on your point of view.
8:14 pm
former romney spokesman richard grenell and ari melber debate the trip, next. [ male announcer ] it seems like every company has a facebook page these days. but where's the relationship status? well, esurance is now in a relationship...with allstate. and it looks pretty serious. esurance. click or call. metamucil uses super hardworking psyllium fiber, which gels to remove unsexy waste and reduce cholesterol. taking psyllium fiber won't make you a model, but you should feel a little more super.
8:15 pm
metamucil. down with cholesterol.
8:16 pm
coming up, the final word of romney's overseas adventure. p ari melber and richard degree nell. a texas tea partier thanks sarah palin, sean hannity and glenn beck in his victory speech last night. we'll explore the lingering effect on the country. and d.l. hughley is raising eyebrows with his provocative new book. i'll ask him all about it tonight. share your thoughts with us on facebook and on twitter using the hash tag ed show. we'll be right back. kate and i have been married for 15 years.
8:17 pm
that's 3 moves, 5 jobs, 2 newborns. it's no wonder i'm getting gray. but kate still looks like...kate. [ female announcer ] with nice'n easy, all they see is you -- in one step, nice'n easy with colorblend technology, is proven to give more blends of tones. for color that's perfectly true to you. [ rob ] i don't know all her secrets but i do know kate's more beautiful now, than the day i married her. [ female announcer ] with the dimensional color of nice'n easy, all they see is you.
8:18 pm
mitt romney's overseas visit came to an end with just as much head scratching as it began. to cap off the trip, romney penned an op-ed for the conservative national review to address his comments about israeli and palestinian cultures. quote, during my recent trip to israel, i had suggested that the choices a society makes about its culture play a role in creating prosperity and that the significant disparity between israeli and palestinian living standards was powerfully influenced by it. in some quarters, that comment became the subject of controversy, but what exactly accounts for prosperity if not culture? it's an interesting statement considering it's the opposite of what romney told fox news the day before. >> i'm not speaking about it, did not speak about the palestinian culture or the decisions made in their economy. that's an interesting topic that perhaps could deserve scholarly analysis, but i actually didn't address that, certainly don't
8:19 pm
intend to address that during my campaign. >> what it fats who said one never knows do one? romney's muddled message is indicative of his foreign policy as a whole. after a week abroad, what do we really know about mitt romney's foreign policy ideas? we know he believes culture accounts for prosperity. he says he believes jerusalem is the capital of israel. and he was endorsed by a anti-communist polish statesman. aside from those red meat bullet points for conservatives, what to we know for sure about foreign relations under mitt romney? did he tell us what he would do if the syrian regime collapsed or if europe's economy fell off a cliff or if we experienced growing tensions with china or north korea or a terrorist organization? some are focusing on the gaffes of mitt romney's trip, but we really should focus on what he didn't say. let's get to it. let's bring in ari melber and rich degree -- rick grenell, now
8:20 pm
a partner with capital media partners. welcome to the show. rick, there was a bright side to your former boss' trip overseas. can you tell us if there was a bright side to it or are we delusional right here? >> i would say that you're delusional actually with all due respect. first, thank you for having me and thanks for having a good debate here. i think that if you really look at what a lot of political reporters are jumping on to say were gaffes, i think it's way overblown, and i don't think it's good for our democracy. i mean, let's just take the first instance in london. here you have a very respectful mitt romney saying to nbc news that he was concerned about the press reports. and that's really what he said. and we saw the media completely jump all over that only after the british media kind of made a heyday, and i'm very experienced with the british media, and this is what they do. they like to have a lot of fun. and then i also saw after the
8:21 pm
london mayor specifically said, mitt romney -- a man named mitt romney -- a man named mitt romney is wondering if we're ready, is what he said. and immediately the british media and american media called that a slam on mitt romney. all he did was say, wondering if we're ready and are we ready? it was not even a slam. it was so overblown -- >> you don't think it was a signification, some guy named mitt romney? you don't think even for the british outside the pale and signifying on him. >> i'll give you it was a little bit, but i saw so many press reports saying the london mayor slams him. i saw a lot of reports saying the british are upset. i mean, look, i spent eight years at the u.n., if that's the biggest problem in a very respectful mitt romney says he's concerned about press reports on security issues, i think we really made too much of this from the political reporters. >> so you don't think i'm being
8:22 pm
delusional. you said i was, but you don't think i'm being delusional, and you think he had a good trip over there. let's turn to ari melber. do you think rick has a point or is he missing the more insightful analyses we might make of the foreign policy adventure? >> i would look at it in three ways. number one, when you are president, you have to deal with the foreign press. so whether they are fair or not, that is one of the layers of international diplomacy because you're dealing with foreign governments and their peoples, their populations and what they get from the media, whether it's state run, fair or unfair. rick may be right that some of the stuff would upset any policy maker, any candidate, but that's part of of the job. number two, were some of the gaffes given too much attention as opposed to the very serious foreign policy challenges we face? yes. so i'll concede that to rick, and i think people who work for politicians and diplomats often have that frustration. but that in and of itself
8:23 pm
doesn't tell us anything about what mitt romney is doing abroad. that brings me to number three and the real point and we can hopefully focus on it now. what governor romney said is that in israel, for example, the united states' policy should be to treat jerusalem as a capital. now, that's a foreign policy position, but it's also a political position. if you look at what's going on in israel, that is not one of the priorities in israel right now. that is a country that has on its borders two huge kinds of geopolitical crises, egypt, a country that's been a dictatorship for decades and is basically the number one ally of israel on its border now having faced an election and a lot of change and having the muslim brotherhood come into power, syria dealing with a civil war, you have real problems in israel, the netten ar n yanyahut those issues. and then you have a candidate come in and focus on something that seemed to a lot of people
8:24 pm
more of a political appeal back home in the u.s. i'll leave it to others to decide what was motivating mitt romney, but on that substantive matter, rick, i have to question why that was the priority and not the border issues. >> let me bring rick in. so ari is saying three things here. first of all, that when you look at -- >> i heard him. i heard him. >> -- what happened, gaffes aside, that you have to look at the policy, you have to deal with the press, and thirdly deal with the substantive characterization here of what is going on in terms of foreign policy. do you think getting beyond the grasp, mitt romney told us what he would do say if the syrian regime collapsed and some other crisis is going on or if europe's economy fell off a cliff, if we experience growing tensions with china, north korea, terrorist organizations, did he give us any indication what might happen? >> there was a lot of questions in there. >> syria, china, north korea, and the collapse of the european economy. >> let me first go back and say that i think ari is exactly right on all these points. i would say on the jerusalem point it's probably not the number one priority as ari said. i agree.
8:25 pm
but he was very clear about this is something that he would do. he would move our embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem. it's interesting, also, that bill clinton agrees with that. bill clinton had that same policy and barack obama had that policy when he was candidate for about 24 hours and then he walked that back. so if anybody is playing politics, it's really the obama campaign, which is trying to distract on this issue because the bill clinton administration as well as mitt romney candidate have been -- they've both been clear. >> just to be clear, rick, to be fair, you mean the bill clinton political campaign, during clinton's tenure, they did not move the embassy. >> no, they didn't move it, but bill clinton made it clear that jerusalem should be the capital of israel. >> wait a minute. let's not microfocus. you're talking about israel alone. what about the other stuff i asked you, about north korea, china, a crisis of syria?
8:26 pm
did he give us any substantive foreign policy insight into the romney administration? >> he has. again, i would go back to the fact that most of the reporters were talking about not getting invited into a fund-raiser. >> forget them. i'm asking you to tell us what he said he would do. >> i would tell you on syria that he was very clear that what he wouldn't do is exactly what barack obama did, which was send a u.s. ambassador back to damascus only to pull him back, only to send him back again and pull him back again. this is a situation -- >> so what would he do, not what obama did. what would he do? >> he wouldn't do that. he would be clear and consistent. >> what would mitt do? >> we wouldn't have a u.s. ambassador sitting in damascus while the leader of syria is killing 7,500 people. that's one thing he would do. >> we'll leave it there. we'll invite you back on, rick and ari. thank you so much. there was a big senate contest in texas last night. so why is sarah palin taking a victory lap? san stein of the huffington post explains. and today millions of women gained access to expanded health
8:27 pm
care. one republican compares that access to pearl harbor. [ male announcer ] hey, isn't that the girl who tore out your still-beating heart? ok, how's this gonna play? try manly [ screams ] [ male announcer ] eew, ok, just do your thing. hey! hey! [ male announcer ] definitely a little bit epic. stride. [ "human" by the human league playing ] humans. we mean well, but we're imperfect creatures living in a beautifully imperfect world.
8:28 pm
it's amazing we've made it this far. maybe it's because when one of us messes up, someone else comes along to help out. that's the thing about humans. when things are at their worst, we're at our best. see how at liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy?
8:29 pm
8:30 pm
former texas solicitor general ted cruz scored a major upset in a run-off election for the open u.s. senate seat in the lone star state. a tea party favorite who rails against the united nations, social security, and sharia law, he's a shoo-in to win the red state in november.
8:31 pm
last night, he thanked the people who made it possible, conservative talk radio, billionaire advocacy groups and the certain half-term governor. >> i want to thank the national leaders who have stepped forward, first and foremost, governor sarah palin. >> sarah palin used the occasion to address the masses in the way she knows best. she wrote on her facebook page, this is a victory both for ted and for the grassroots tea party movement. so who was cruz's opponent? some screaming liberal? some neophyte? actually, it was the lieutenant governor, republican david dewhurst. a man by the laws of the state the most powerful political figure in texas. his four-point election platform called for the repeal of obama care, eliminating the power of the epa and national labor relations board and rejecting green energy initiatives. this is hardly a socialist agenda. but cruz was backed by the big money parties like freedom
8:32 pm
works, the club for growth and the tea party express. and he was endorsed by senators. >> i am incredibly honored and humbled to be the only candidate in the country who is supported by them. they support me because they need support. they're out numbered by democrats and fellow republicans who won't stand and fight. >> there's very little doubt about the tea party's ability to stand and fight. whether or not it can govern is another question entirely. let's bring in huffington post political reporter sam stein. welcome to the show. >> thanks for having me. >> how big of a blow and this to the republican party? this is a big gust of wind for the tea party, no? >> short term i think it's not a blow, but in the long term it could pose real problems for mitch mcconnell, along the lines of what we have seen john boehner do. it was not that he was moderate, he was constructive. by that i mean he passed
8:33 pm
primarily republican legislation in texas. and people thought of that as not the type of law making they want to bring to washington. the freedom works talked about the cruz victory, saying this is the next step in the hostile takeover of washington, d.c. they don't want to have constructive governance. they want to bring things to a halt. that's why the energy was behind ted cruz in the end. >> given the paradigm shift from governing to constructive obstruction, does the continuing influx of tea party lawmakers make gridlock an insurmountable reality here? >> you think things were bad this past year, they could conceivably get much worse. we're dealing with a reality in which the senate could be controlled by mitch mcconnell. the presidency could remain in president obama's hands, you have a truly divided government with congress republican control and senate with democratic control. but within those republican caucuses, there are the moderates, dwindling number, and then there are the tea party factions. there's been several major moderate retirements announced,
8:34 pm
and in each case, those moderate lawmakers go out by complaining about sort of the boiterne bittd acrimony in their own party and within government as a whole. it gets worse the more you see people like ted cruz elections because they want to bring things to a halt. >> if the people within the republican caucus itself, so to speak, in the broader republican circles are fed up at the intransigence of the tea party, does it bode well for a person like ted cruz? is he going to be a major player on the national stage? >> sure, and part of the reason he was elected is he had that to him, that dynamic to him. he's the type of dynamic figure that i think could be a fast riser in the republican party. the question is when you get to washington, do you benefit by beg someone who works within the confines of governance and passes legislation? that was the traditional path, you would pass landmark piece of legislation and attach your name to that, or are you the type of guy who holds things to a halt,
8:35 pm
who tries to change the dynamic? that's what you're seeing, for instance, with senator jim demint. who built his reputation by saying i'm going to blow up the traditional republican party and recast it as the tea party. >> and even further on the margins are the dick lugers and the bob doles and the kay bailey hutchisons who seem for that matter to be knee and ra thauls within the republican party, speaking of which, of course, a newer version of that party, sarah palin, used this victory lap to take a swipe at dick cheney for saying her vice presidential nomination. >> seeing how dick -- excuse me, vice president cheney never misfires, he's convinced what he read about me by the lamestream media, having being written, what i believe is a false narrative over the last four years, dick cheney believed that stuff. >> now, calling the former veep by his first name was a deliberate attempt there. that was no mistake.
8:36 pm
are establishment republicans still worried about sarah palin? >> did she say dick? she meant vice president cheney, obviously. first of all, let's put this to rest. dick cheney is right. the election results are the election results. it was a bad choice. she didn't help out mccain as much as the mccain people hoped she would. as for your question, i mean, sarah palin has had an enormous effect in the course of these primaries. i think her influence is felt when you're talking about the really activated base versus the more moderate establishment. she's very good at ginning up support. she has a legion of followers who will donate, rally to the candidates and policies of her cause. so, yeah, she has an enormous influence over the party and she will continue to have it. i think when she steps into the actual electoral field, that's when she gets into trouble. >> all right. sam tine, thank you so much. >> of course. there's a lot coming up in the next half hour on "the ed show" stay tuned. >> it's outrageous that this administration believes it's within their power to force
8:37 pm
people to violate their right of religion. >> a new era in women's health begins today thanks to obamacare, but not everyone is celebrating. the big panel weighs in next. comedian d.l. hughley is turning heads with his new book on politics, race, and much more. he joins me live tonight. and the great gore vidal is dead at the age of 86. i'll pay tribute to a man who called us the united states of amnesia. i go ahead of you? instead we had someone go ahead of him and win fifty thousand dollars. congratulations you are our one millionth customer. people don't like to miss out on money that should have been theirs. that's why at ally we have the raise your rate 2-year cd. you can get a one-time rate increase if our two-year rate goes up. if your bank makes you miss out, you need an ally. ally bank. no nonsense. just people sense.
8:38 pm
8:39 pm
♪ hello...rings ♪ what the... what the... what the... ♪ are you seein' this? ♪
8:40 pm
♪ uh-huh... uh-huh... uh-huh... ♪ ♪ it kinda makes me miss the days when we ♪ ♪ used to rock the microphone ♪ back when our credit score couldn't get us a micro-loan ♪ ♪ so light it up! ♪ even better than we did before ♪ ♪ yeah prep yourself america we're back for more ♪ ♪ our look is slacker chic and our sound is hardcore ♪ ♪ and we're here to drop a rhyme about free-credit-score ♪ ♪ i'm singing free-credit-score-dot-com ♪ ♪ dot-com narrator: offer applies with enrollment in but today, august 1st, we come here -- we come here to fix this microphone. we come here for a very specific reason because today is the day that religious freedom died. >> religious freedom is dead in america? at least according to the republican party. why? because today 47 million women gained access to expanded health care coverage at no additional cost. in fact, women will save money by eliminating out of pocket
8:41 pm
expenses. insured women enrolling in a new plan or renewing their existing one are now eligible for several additional health care benefits under the affordable care act. that means guaranteed coverage for a wide range of free preventive services like yearly checkups, gestational diabetes testing, testing for hiv, hpv, contraception coverage without co-pays, breast feeding support and domestic violence counseling. religious employers are exempt from offering this coverage to their loyemployees. yet, according to one tea party congressman, women gaining access to free preventive care is akin to a terrorist attack. >> i know in your mind, you can think of the times america was attacked. one is december 7th, pearl harbor attack. the other is september 11th and that's the day the terrorist attack. i want you to remember august
8:42 pm
1, 2012, i an attack on our religious freedom. that's a date that will live in infamy along with those other dates. >> wow, that was not a fireside chat by fdr. i'm joined by joann reed and republican strategist susan del percio to whom i'll turn first. is expanded health care coverage on par with a terrorist attack, for real, though? >> no, i promise. no. end it there. i mean, there is a point to be made. they say there's a religious carve-out here, but it's really not the case. and you know, the work-around still does put a lot of religious institutions in a bind. that being said, preventive care of any sort as far as i'm concerned is a great thing. all of these things that are being done for women are fantastic, especially in a day and age where viagra is covered. so we're talking about preventive health care, saving lives, versus, you know, some other things that are covered. so i have no problem with that. i do have a problem with how they handled the religious exemption for it.
8:43 pm
>> the only thing is i think they should cover more viagra in it. president obama offered a compromise to religious institutions on this. why isn't that enough? >> well, you know what, it's interesting. because what we've seen here is that there is a segment of the religious right that is arguing for what they call religious liberty, but what they really are saying is they want religious institutions to control public policy, which is the opposite of what the founders wanted. they wanted the separation of church and state, but they seem to be arguing that religious principles should govern public policy. that's just wrong. this is about the control of women, about saying we don't want women to have access to free health care because of our religious beliefs. >> what about that, the principles of the founding fathers who are often referred to by our republican brothers and sisters, they often get twisted up in trying to govern as opposed to allowing everyone to have a room to breathe. what do you think, susan? >> don't get me wrong, we're talking about great people who did wonderful things and the constitution is fantastic, and everyone always turns to it. but you have to remember, this
8:44 pm
was created by a bunch of white men, rich white men, women counted as nothing. anyone else who wasn't white counted as nothing. i don't always necessarily go back to that as the premise of how we should make all of our decisions. >> sure. >> but, that being said, in this case, people do -- you can't disregard the feeling of a lot of people, whether it's the church or any of the religious institutions. you can't discard that, and the work-around, frankly, did not get the job done. i will say politically they did a great job handling it, you know, as far as that came from, but this was not a true work-around. this did not address those concerns which are very valid. although i do agree with joy. i don't want government and religion mixing that much, but at the same time, government should not have that oversight over religion either. >> let's shift to a very important topic. today was national appreciation day for chick-fil-a. mike huckabee did a victory lap
8:45 pm
on fox news earlier. let's take a look. >> this is a big day. not for chick-fil-a but for america and people who believe that the first amendment applies to everybody, including christians. >> we have 45 seconds. if you ain't doing a victory lap there for popeye's i'm not even interested. but the point is, what do we make of this? is this something about freedom of expression or about the state interposing itself? >> i think this is a misinterpretation of what the first amendment means. the first amendment does not say you have a right to have a franchise of chick-fil-a whenever you want. and there's no one who has prevented mr. kathy, the head of chick-fil-a for saying whatever he wants or believes whatever he wants. >> 20 seconds. >> but to punish someone for their beliefs and to go after them in this way and then to use government again to bar them from getting zoning permits, et cetera, is a dangerous step. >> maybe we'll make the colonel give up his secrets next for his 11 ingredients. joy-ann reid and susan del percio, thank you very much. coming up, gore vidal is
8:46 pm
dead at the age of 86. i'm pay tribute to the literally juggernaut in the dyson-ary. stay tuned. the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge. well today, there's a new new york state. one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at
8:47 pm
coming up, a tribute to late author gore vidal. we'll be right back. no, no it's her dad. the general's your soul mate? dude what? no, no, no. he's, he's on my back about providing for his little girl. hey don't worry. e-trade's got a killer investing dashboard. everything is on one page, your investments, quotes, research... it's like the buffet last night. whatever helps you understand man. i'm watching you. oh yeah? well i'm watching you, watching him. [ male announcer ] try the e-trade 360 investing dashboard. the global ready one ? yeah, but you won't need... ♪ hajimemashite. hajimemashite. hajimemashite. you guys like football ? thank you so much. i'm stoked. you stoked ? totally. ... and he says, "under the mattress."
8:48 pm
souse le matelas. ( laughter ) why's the new guy sending me emails from paris ? paris, france ? verizon's 4g lte devices are global-ready. plus, global data for just $25. only from verizon.
8:49 pm
you're not joking when i refer to our country as the united states of amnesia, although i was corrected recently by studs turkof out of chicago. he said, gore, it's not the united states of amnesia, it's the united states of alzheimer's. >> that was gore vidal who sadly passed away yesterday. his book "the united states of amnesia" got me thinking. in tonight's dyson-ary i'll show you what the word "a.m. knees ar -- amnesia means to the republicans. first let's look at the definition. a loss of a large block of memory.
8:50 pm
recently the republican party has come down with some nasty cases of amnesia that coincidentally harm the president. first the individual mandate. before the passage of the affordable care act, republicans widely supported the idea. governor romney individual mandate. now he and the rest of the republican party are running on repealing the president's health care law. second, infrastructure spending. before the president took office, republicans wanted to improve our roads and bridges just like everyone else. now, the gop has blocked a number of infrastructure bills that would have created countless jobs. and finally, tax cuts. tax reduction has always been a pillar of the republican platform. but earlier today, house republicans blocked an amendment to extend tax cuts to people making less than $250,000 a
8:51 pm
year. so let's turn to the dyson-ary to find out what the word amnesia means for republicans. amnesia, loss of a large block of interrelated memories, complete or partial loss of memory when it helps we as republicans harm the president. so republicans may have amnesia, but i don't. i'm going to remember gore vidal. i'm going to remember all of the progressive ideas he fought for, and i'm going to keep the fight going. tonight in our survey, i asked you, does mitt romney's tax plan make any sense for the middle class? 7% say yes, 93% say no. coming up, comedian d.l. hughley has a new book out. he joins me next to talk president obama, mitt romney, and race in america. you don't want to miss this. stay tuned.
8:52 pm
it's something you're born with. and inspires the things you choose to do. you do what you do... because it matters. at hp we don't just believe in the power of technology. we believe in the power of people when technology works for you. to dream. to create. to work. if you're going to do something. make it matter. and i thought "i can't do this, it's just too hard." then there was a moment. when i decided to find a way to keep going. go for olympic gold and go to college too. [ male announcer ] every day we help students earn their bachelor's or master's degree for tomorrow's careers. this is your moment. let nothing stand in your way.
8:53 pm
devry university, proud to support the education of our u.s. olympic team.
8:54 pm
8:55 pm
it would have been awfully hard to fraudulently file the birth notice of barack obama being born in hawaii. that doesn't mean there aren't some other explanations on how they might have announced that by telegram from kenya. the list goes on and on. >> that was congressman steve king at it again, trying to keep the birther myth alive. whether it's the dog whistle politics of birtherism or unprecedented republican obstructionism, the gop has tried its best to delegitimize barack obama. author and great comedian d.l. hughley is taking on everything from the gop's strategy to his new book "i want you to shut the [ bleep ] up." he said the reason he's having these problems is because the people who love him aren't forcing him to do what he needs
8:56 pm
to do. conservatives have no problem, if you don't do what they want they will do something to you. it's quid pro quo. it's no secret and there's no trick. they treat him harshly because he's black. conversely, liberals treat him with kid gloves for that same reason. this man is trying to start some stuff on this show. joining me now is author and comedian d.l. hughley. he will be at the wise guys comedy club in salt lake city this friday through sunday. salt lake city? >> yeah. >> me and the other black people in the witness protection program, and karl malone's kids. >> look, you said the election of the first black president has given folks the idea that race relations have improved. tell us how that's the case. why is it that the election of this man? >> it would be foolish to believe they haven't. it would also be foolish to believe we have utopia. look at -- just this segment, when in history has someone -- whether barack obama was born in
8:57 pm
america or not, one thing is for sure, he didn't do it. he was just being born. >> he didn't determine it. >> he didn't type -- if he did that, he would be in mensa and not the president. >> romney does believe in retroactivity. >> i think it's silly. i also think the state i made earlier, who have you ever seen great that didn't have an external driving force and they weren't a critic, they were somebody who loved them? whether it was a parent or a coach. name me someone who became great without being pushed to it. >> so let me ask you this. a lot of black people take tremendous offense at any person, especially a black person, who is even gently or constructive critical of the president. you indicated that's a problem. >> name me a woman who would be a man who promises something and didn't deliver. if you didn't deliver, pretty shouldn't, she wouldn't give you quarter, and i think there are
8:58 pm
ways to gently criticize someone. i think he's done some great things. i haven't seen a piece of legislation this important since lyndon b. johnson. no president has been this brave. the affordable health care act was the bravest thing i have ever seen in my lifetime, a politician do. that doesn't mean i can't also have legitimate criticism. >> what are some legitimate criticisms? >> the first thing i saw is when i thought joe wilson called him a liar, and there was no response, it fundamentally changed the course of the presidency. i think had he said, i'm the president of the united states, you don't have to respect me but you have to respect the office. remove him from the premises. when you grow up, you have a bully, at that moment you understand this cat is trying to take your lunch, and you're going to keep it. and i think fundamentally, it was that kind of fork in the road and it became different. >> you say about stereotypes that obviously some of these things can be extremely offensive, but in the main, it contains information about the
8:59 pm
other person that we're too politically correct to admit. tell me about it. >> i know more people who are like the stereotype that i attribute to them than they don't. they know, i have the friend, that friend is the exception, not the rule. like to me, chick-fil-a, this controversy, it's appreciate day, hilarious, like americans need an excuse to eat fast food. you'll never see a broccoli appreciation day. the great thing for me is that i hope conservatives eat chick-fil-a every day and they'll appreciate the obama care program. but it's a quandary because, mike, i dig fried chicken. this chick-fil-a, whatever they did to this is amazing. so now i have -- i dig the chicken sandwich. i hate their stance on gay marriage. my compromise is i'll have the chicken but not the bun. >> or eat at popeye's maybe. >> right. two dudes on msnbc talking about fried chicken. so horrible.